Is 1080p really needed in games ?

[QUOTE="arto1223"]

[QUOTE="Cranler"]I'll tell you this, Halo 3 at 600p on console destroys Halo 2 pc version at 1600p. Cranler

Oh, so you're just ignorant.

You would have to be if you think comparing a game that came out on the old XBox and ported over to the PC would look (un-modded) better than a game released many years later with a new engine on a new system. It's funny though, because there is a mod for Halo 2 on the PC that turns it into Halo 3 and it looks far better than the 360 version (in both 720 and 1080 because of all the added effects).

There was much more than that added to Halo 3 over Halo 2. You're lying or just an idiot if you think otherwise.

Resolution is not the only important factor, you're taking what we're saying wrong. If you have all these effects and textures in game, but at a low resolution, then it doesn't matter how good they look, they are in low resolution. If the game is at a high resolution, but has crap effects and crap textures, then it will look like crisp crap. You need both to have a good looking game.

Luckily, PCs are capable of doing both, but consoles cannot. Hence, low resolution console games.

[QUOTE="Cranler"][QUOTE="Bebi_vegeta"]

What does AA and blur filter have anything to do. It's about the same difference that you accepted from Crysis picture... what is this flip flop ?

I also love how you ignore my question as to why 720p is even needed... that's just prove you're BS all along this topic.

Bebi_vegeta

Well my point and what most people here is, resolution does matter... just like any other graphic setting you can find out there. So it's all about compromise, either it be resolution or other things. Forget CGI graphics, the hardware is not that yet.

Resolution can play a small or big role, it depends on source and the output.

[QUOTE="Cranler"]

[QUOTE="arto1223"]

Oh, so you're just ignorant.

You would have to be if you think comparing a game that came out on the old XBox and ported over to the PC would look (un-modded) better than a game released many years later with a new engine on a new system. It's funny though, because there is a mod for Halo 2 on the PC that turns it into Halo 3 and it looks far better than the 360 version (in both 720 and 1080 because of all the added effects).

arto1223

There was much more than that added to Halo 3 over Halo 2. You're lying or just an idiot if you think otherwise.

Resolution is not the only important factor, you're taking what we're saying wrong. If you have all these effects and textures in game, but at a low resolution, then it doesn't matter how good they look, they are in low resolution. If the game is at a high resolution, but has crap effects and crap textures, then it will look like crisp crap. You need both to have a good looking game.

Luckily, PCs are capable of doing both, but consoles cannot. Hence, low resolution console games.

[QUOTE="arto1223"]

[QUOTE="Cranler"]

Halo 3 is an upgraded version of the engine used for Halo 2. HDR and better shadowing are the big differences between Halo 2 and Halo 3. Many people in this thread speak as if resolution is everything in this thread. If it was then Halo 2 would look better at higher res. How does a graohics mod have any relevance to my point, this thread is about graphics detail settings vs resolution.

Cranler

There was much more than that added to Halo 3 over Halo 2. You're lying or just an idiot if you think otherwise.

Resolution is not the only important factor, you're taking what we're saying wrong. If you have all these effects and textures in game, but at a low resolution, then it doesn't matter how good they look, they are in low resolution. If the game is at a high resolution, but has crap effects and crap textures, then it will look like crisp crap. You need both to have a good looking game.

Luckily, PCs are capable of doing both, but consoles cannot. Hence, low resolution console games.

I always turn shadows off. Even in PlanetSide 2 and BF3 where I have everything on max and still get over 60fps, I turn off shadows. HDR lighting is fine. It doesn't hit hard and it looks fine. I get over 100fps in BF3 when recording on max at 1080. PC hardware is fine, we get great graphics and crazy high resolutions in which people have three 1080 monitors for one game.

I'm more than happy with 720p 60fps.

Sorry, theres more going on here than just a res change unless you expect me to beleive 720p cant properly render the color blue. If this was for real then 480p would be black and white and too blurry to even read menus or ammo counts. Most likey the 720p shot has a blur filter similar to GTA 4.Cranler

Wrong! I made this gif and it is default PC 720p vs DSfix running with SweetFX (only colour correction and FXAA). No additional sharpening, if anything the FXAA should take away the original sharpness of the 1080p default image. I use SweetFX to get an extra punch from the game with stronger contrasts and more saturated colors. Also please don't compare downsized 1080p images with 720p, makes you look like a newb since detail gets lost.

But since I know your type and this is system wars and I can expect butthurt denial. Here is a comparison from the default settings with only high resolution being implemented. I think this is comparing default 720p vs 3000p. Showing your point wrong since there are gains beyond 1080p with default assets and settings but adding higher resolution.

graphics >>> resolution.magicalclick

What's with all the people in this thread not understanding that increasing resolution is a huge part of enhancing graphics? They're not exclusive of each other. Advancing graphical assets without increasing resolution has made games look better up to this point, but it's seeing diminishing returns extremely quickly. Resolution has to be increased ALONG WITH enhancing assets, or else the assets are just going to waste. This is undeniably proven by the plethora of current gen games that already have assets with detail that is completely invisible at 720p, and becomes visible at 1080p or more. Why don't people get that? Why pile more detail into assets without increasing resolution, when assets are already too detailed to be seen at less than 1080p, and have been for years?

Another loosey thread that will surpass 500 posts. Flawless victory.

[QUOTE="Cranler"]

Sorry, theres more going on here than just a res change unless you expect me to beleive 720p cant properly render the color blue. If this was for real then 480p would be black and white and too blurry to even read menus or ammo counts. Most likey the 720p shot has a blur filter similar to GTA 4.theSADmafioso

Wrong! I made this gif and it is default PC 720p vs DSfix running with SweetFX (only colour correction and FXAA). No additional sharpening, if anything the FXAA should take away the original sharpness of the 1080p default image. I use SweetFX to get an extra punch from the game with stronger contrasts and more saturated colors. Also please don't compare downsized 1080p images with 720p, makes you look like a newb since detail gets lost.

But since I know your type and this is system wars and I can expect butthurt denial. Here is a comparison from the default settings with only high resolution being implemented. I think this is comparing default 720p vs 3000p. Showing your point wrong since there are gains beyond 1080p with default assets and settings but adding higher resolution.

Another PCvsConsoles thread that will surpass 500 posts. Flawless victory.

Master_ShakeXXX

fix'd

[QUOTE="Bebi_vegeta"]

[QUOTE="Cranler"]After 45 pages you'd think everyone would undertsand what this thread was about. In fact this is the opposite of what the thread is about. Youre showing higher res with higher detail settings vs lower res with lower detail settings. Thread is about high res with low settings vs low res with high settings. How about comparing Cod 2 to Cod 4 on console because thats what this thread is about.

Cranler

And what setting would the blur come from ?

I had an IQ problemlowe0

It's not something that goes away.

[QUOTE="lowe0"]I had an IQ problemtenaka2

It's not something that goes away.

[QUOTE="tenaka2"]

[QUOTE="lowe0"]I had an IQ problemlowe0

It's not something that goes away.

hi lowe0

what you are arguing today? 720p vs 1080p is preference? :lol:

I mean shouldnt every inch of power go to make games look closer to CGI in 720p, than have mediocre graphics in 1080p ?

I dont see games anywhere close to 720p movie quality yet

loosingENDS

You only make these stupid topics because you have a puny 32" 720P non-HD TV.

For real gamers we can already go past 1080p. SUCKS TO BE GREEK I GUESS

[QUOTE="tenaka2"]

[QUOTE="lowe0"]I had an IQ problemlowe0

It's not something that goes away.

We already discussed this, you have agreed that console gamers have lower standards. There is nothing left to discuss.

[QUOTE="lowe0"][QUOTE="tenaka2"]

It's not something that goes away.

tenaka2

We already discussed this, you have agreed that console gamers have lower standards. There is nothing left to discuss.

[QUOTE="tenaka2"]

[QUOTE="lowe0"] I'm curious as to whether you even considered an actual contribution to the discussion before you settled on this instead.lowe0

We already discussed this, you have agreed that console gamers have lower standards. There is nothing left to discuss.

But as you alraedy admitted, console gamers are happy to make to with slightly brown apples, some containing worms. PC gamers have the golden delicious.

Pics seem fine to me, console version = blurry mess. PC version = shiney goodness.

[QUOTE="lowe0"][QUOTE="tenaka2"]

We already discussed this, you have agreed that console gamers have lower standards. There is nothing left to discuss.

tenaka2

But as you alraedy admitted, console gamers are happy to make to with slightly brown apples, some containing worms. PC gamers have the golden delicious.

Pics seem fine to me, console version = blurry mess. PC version = shiney goodness.

[QUOTE="tenaka2"]

[QUOTE="lowe0"] Except that we're not even discussing standards yet. The discussion was about whether an altered image passed off as an unaltered one represents an apples to apples comparison.lowe0

But as you alraedy admitted, console gamers are happy to make to with slightly brown apples, some containing worms. PC gamers have the golden delicious.

Pics seem fine to me, console version = blurry mess. PC version = shiney goodness.

Peer reviewed source for this baseless assumption please.

[QUOTE="lowe0"][QUOTE="tenaka2"]

But as you alraedy admitted, console gamers are happy to make to with slightly brown apples, some containing worms. PC gamers have the golden delicious.

Pics seem fine to me, console version = blurry mess. PC version = shiney goodness.

tenaka2

Peer reviewed source for this baseless assumption please.

[QUOTE="tenaka2"]

[QUOTE="lowe0"] Your post has absolutely nothing to do with the discussion. Preference and standards are certainly a matter of opinion, but whether an image has been altered beyond a simple scaling is not.lowe0

Peer reviewed source for this baseless assumption please.

Anecdotal evidence at best. Aside from which are you suggesting that PC images should downgraded before being posted incase they upset consolites?

[QUOTE="lowe0"][QUOTE="tenaka2"]

Peer reviewed source for this baseless assumption please.

tenaka2

Anecdotal evidence at best. Aside from which are you suggesting that PC images should downgraded before being posted incase they upset consolites?

I'm also saying that if someone claims that skepticism indicates a lack of IQ, then it's going to leave some well deserved egg on their face if the skeptic turns out to be correct. For that reason, perhaps posters should stick to the content of posts instead of attacking the poster.

So there is color correction applied (and FXAA) instead of just a simple resolution change. Now, I believe someone was saying I had an IQ problem merely for saying exactly that?lowe0

Yeah, should I disclose my screen calibration and brigness and gamma setting as well then because colour correction is compltely irrelevant to the IQ of the comparison I provided except enhancing colours. I also provided another only screen comparsion by the creator of DSfix. Also FXAA blurs the image to even out jaggies last I check, and should in a way make the image less sharp but more even. Consider yourself informed.

[QUOTE="lowe0"] So there is color correction applied (and FXAA) instead of just a simple resolution change. Now, I believe someone was saying I had an IQ problem merely for saying exactly that?theSADmafioso

Yeah, should I disclose my screen calibration and brigness and gamma setting as well then because colour correction is compltely irrelevant to the IQ of the comparison I provided except enhancing colours. I also provided another only screen comparsion by the creator of DSfix. Also FXAA blurs the image to even out jaggies last I check, and should in a way make the image less sharp but more even. Consider yourself informed.

If it's applied evenly to both images, then no. The point is that the images should differ in only a single aspect, or that other differences should be disclosed so that we can all draw conclusions about what the images actually represent.lowe0

Okay, here you go. Your precious little 720p with SweetFX looks even worse than default setting because of the low res. I did you a favour with the last comparsion, now go and be butthurt somewhere else. But knowing little fanboys like you, you'll probably whine about how I didn't manage to get the camera in the same postion for the two screens. Both screens default with SweetFX running same settings. Resolution matters in games, no way around that.

[QUOTE="lowe0"]

If it's applied evenly to both images, then no. The point is that the images should differ in only a single aspect, or that other differences should be disclosed so that we can all draw conclusions about what the images actually represent.theSADmafioso

Okay, here you go. Your precious little 720p with SweetFX looks even worse than default setting because of the low res. I did you a favour with the last comparsion, now go and be butthurt somewhere else. But knowing little fanboys like you, you'll probably whine about how I didn't manage to get the camera in the same postion for the two screens. Both screens default with SweetFX running same settings. Resolution matters in games, no way around that.

..................................................... what do you think happens when you stretch that image out to the size of a tv....

..................................................... what do you think happens when you stretch that image out to the size of a tv....

jettpack

you get cinematic blur and console exclusive vaseline detail

[QUOTE="Cranler"][QUOTE="arto1223"]

There was much more than that added to Halo 3 over Halo 2. You're lying or just an idiot if you think otherwise.

Resolution is not the only important factor, you're taking what we're saying wrong. If you have all these effects and textures in game, but at a low resolution, then it doesn't matter how good they look, they are in low resolution. If the game is at a high resolution, but has crap effects and crap textures, then it will look like crisp crap. You need both to have a good looking game.

Luckily, PCs are capable of doing both, but consoles cannot. Hence, low resolution console games.

arto1223

I always turn shadows off. Even in PlanetSide 2 and BF3 where I have everything on max and still get over 60fps, I turn off shadows. HDR lighting is fine. It doesn't hit hard and it looks fine. I get over 100fps in BF3 when recording on max at 1080. PC hardware is fine, we get great graphics and crazy high resolutions in which people have three 1080 monitors for one game.

[QUOTE="Cranler"]

Sorry, theres more going on here than just a res change unless you expect me to beleive 720p cant properly render the color blue. If this was for real then 480p would be black and white and too blurry to even read menus or ammo counts. Most likey the 720p shot has a blur filter similar to GTA 4.theSADmafioso

Wrong! I made this gif and it is default PC 720p vs DSfix running with SweetFX (only colour correction and FXAA). No additional sharpening, if anything the FXAA should take away the original sharpness of the 1080p default image. I use SweetFX to get an extra punch from the game with stronger contrasts and more saturated colors. Also please don't compare downsized 1080p images with 720p, makes you look like a newb since detail gets lost.

But since I know your type and this is system wars and I can expect butthurt denial. Here is a comparison from the default settings with only high resolution being implemented. I think this is comparing default 720p vs 3000p. Showing your point wrong since there are gains beyond 1080p with default assets and settings but adding higher resolution.

[QUOTE="theSADmafioso"]

[QUOTE="Cranler"]

Sorry, theres more going on here than just a res change unless you expect me to beleive 720p cant properly render the color blue. If this was for real then 480p would be black and white and too blurry to even read menus or ammo counts. Most likey the 720p shot has a blur filter similar to GTA 4.Cranler

Wrong! I made this gif and it is default PC 720p vs DSfix running with SweetFX (only colour correction and FXAA). No additional sharpening, if anything the FXAA should take away the original sharpness of the 1080p default image. I use SweetFX to get an extra punch from the game with stronger contrasts and more saturated colors. Also please don't compare downsized 1080p images with 720p, makes you look like a newb since detail gets lost.

But since I know your type and this is system wars and I can expect butthurt denial. Here is a comparison from the default settings with only high resolution being implemented. I think this is comparing default 720p vs 3000p. Showing your point wrong since there are gains beyond 1080p with default assets and settings but adding higher resolution.

still harping about the slight color change while ignoring the vast quantities of revealed detail from a simple resolution change. Oi vey

[QUOTE="Cranler"]

[QUOTE="Bebi_vegeta"]

And what setting would the blur come from ?

faizan_faizan

Could it be something to do with the restrictive colour palette of the Graphics Interchange Format?

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Graphics_Interchange_Format

Apparently there is a restriction of 256 colours in the palette. Maybe it chose a different hue for blue between the two pictures?

[QUOTE="faizan_faizan"][QUOTE="Cranler"] Not all multiplats have the same settings transferred over to pc. GTA 4 and BF 3 are the only ones I know of that come with the blur filter option. GTA 4 doesnt support aa without mods or Nvidias fxaa which wasnt around when GTA 4 pc released. GTA 4 is an absolute jagfest, it almost did look better with the blur filter on. BF 3 also has a similar filter option as well. Console Cod has 2xaa which isnt enough to remove the jaggies hence the blur filter. I hope you understand the point of this thread though now.Cranler

Could it be something to do with the restrictive colour palette of the Graphics Interchange Format?

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Graphics_Interchange_Format

Apparently there is a restriction of 256 colours in the palette. Maybe it chose a different hue for blue between the two pictures?

psymon100

the creator of the gif already said in this thread he has SweetFx applied, which has a color enhancement option. Still has nothing to do with the amount of detail revealed by bumping up to 1080p thogh

still harping about the slight color change while ignoring the vast quantities of revealed detail from a simple resolution change. Oi vey

wis3boi

I mean shouldnt every inch of power go to make games look closer to CGI in 720p, than have mediocre graphics in 1080p ?

I dont see games anywhere close to 720p movie quality yet

loosingENDS

That would only be possible if there is real-time ray-tracing with AA and other stuff done during the rendering process. Until then, resolution will remain important. Hopefully it'll happen during our lifetime.

[QUOTE="Cranler"]

[QUOTE="theSADmafioso"]

Wrong! I made this gif and it is default PC 720p vs DSfix running with SweetFX (only colour correction and FXAA). No additional sharpening, if anything the FXAA should take away the original sharpness of the 1080p default image. I use SweetFX to get an extra punch from the game with stronger contrasts and more saturated colors. Also please don't compare downsized 1080p images with 720p, makes you look like a newb since detail gets lost.

But since I know your type and this is system wars and I can expect butthurt denial. Here is a comparison from the default settings with only high resolution being implemented. I think this is comparing default 720p vs 3000p. Showing your point wrong since there are gains beyond 1080p with default assets and settings but adding higher resolution.

wis3boi

still harping about the slight color change while ignoring the vast quantities of revealed detail from a simple resolution change. Oi vey

I was the one who linked to the thread where he got the other gif from. I still say that even without the color change its not a proper representaion of a res change. Here are my own screens at 1080p and 720p and the 720p isnt a blurry mess like the Dark Souls low res shot. All the details for example on the clothes and sword hilt are intact. Does it look as good? No but nowhere near the disparity in the Dark Souls shots. Naysayers are saying that the better the graphics are the higher res you need to display the improvements yet here we have The Witcher 2 which is way beyond Dark Souls pathetic graphics and the advanced graphics look great at 720p.

Cranler

Wow! You really opended my eyes of how useless 1080p and beyond is. There is no blur at 720p!!! I mean look at this screen I just took in UltraHD 2160p and then I resized it down to 480p and it still looks crisp as hell!!! God damn!!111 On the other hand I wonder what will happened if I save this image and then run it in full screen mode on my 24 inch monitor? BUT BUT, WHY DID IT GUT BLUUUURRD??!!!!

[QUOTE="kraken2109"][QUOTE="Cranler"] The definition option is a blur toggle to reduce jaggies. Cranler

Irrelevant. Sweetfx can apply fxaa to any game with any hardware

Naysayers are saying that the better the graphics are the higher res you need to display the improvements yet here we have The Witcher 2 which is way beyond Dark Souls pathetic graphics and the advanced graphics look great at 720p.Cranler

Those shots aren't entirely accurate. You need to have both shots at 1080p. Photobucket limits image size to 1024x576. Try imageshack with the no image resize option.

Edit:

That plus Photobucket sometimes have AA enabled that softens the look of images.

[QUOTE="Cranler"]Naysayers are saying that the better the graphics are the higher res you need to display the improvements yet here we have The Witcher 2 which is way beyond Dark Souls pathetic graphics and the advanced graphics look great at 720p.jun_aka_pekto

Those shots aren't entirely accurate. You need to have both shots at 1080p. Photobucket limits image size to 1024x576. Try imageshack with the no image resize option.

Edit:

That plus Photobucket sometimes have AA enabled that softens the look of images.

[QUOTE="Cranler"]

I was the one who linked to the thread where he got the other gif from. I still say that even without the color change its not a proper representaion of a res change. Here are my own screens at 1080p and 720p and the 720p isnt a blurry mess like the Dark Souls low res shot. All the details for example on the clothes and sword hilt are intact. Does it look as good? No but nowhere near the disparity in the Dark Souls shots. Naysayers are saying that the better the graphics are the higher res you need to display the improvements yet here we have The Witcher 2 which is way beyond Dark Souls pathetic graphics and the advanced graphics look great at 720p.

theSADmafioso

Wow! You really opended my eyes of how useless 1080p and beyond is. There is no blur at 720p!!! I mean look at this screen I just took in UltraHD 2160p and then I resized it down to 480p and it still looks crisp as hell!!! God damn!!111 On the other hand I wonder what will happened if I save this image and then run it in full screen mode on my 24 inch monitor? BUT BUT, WHY DID IT GUT BLUUUURRD??!!!!

Here's another couple of screenshots. Alan Wake this time. One is 1080p Low, the other is 720p High....enjoy. Oh. Right-Click, View Image to see both at 1080p.

Edit:

Maybe it's just me. But, the 1080p Low looks clearer even resized at 800x450.